Partygate could have been avoided if police had properly investigated the alleged violations of the blockade by Dominic Cummings, a former attorney general said.
Nazir Afzal, the attorney general for the North West of England until 2015, also expressed irritation at new revelations about the way Durham police investigated Cummings’ travels to Durham and Barnard Castle after being discovered by the Guardian and Mirror in May 2020. d.
Last month, Durham’s chief police officer, Joe Farrell, admitted that its staff had not interviewed Cummings as part of their three-day investigation into movements to block the then-chief adviser to Boris Johnson.
She told the Mirror that the forces instead treated Cummings’ televised press conference in the Rose Garden on Downing Street as a witness statement about his behavior.
In May 2021, Cummings admitted to lawmakers that he had not told the whole truth about the rose garden. “I probably need to explain some things about this that were not released to the public at the time in the rose garden,” he said at a joint session of two selected committees.
Speaking to the Guardian, Afzal said: “Police are counting on a story from which the suspect himself later deviated. That in itself makes it possible that the police investigation was wrong. “
Afzal’s lawyers, Hodge Jones and Allen, wrote to the metropolitan and Durham police, urging them to share all the “lessons learned” about their attitude toward Cummings’ behavior in light of a more in-depth investigation that officials eventually conducted in Partygate.
And they asked if Met still maintained his decision not to investigate Cummings, leaving London for Durham when he suspected Covid.
Afzal said: “If the police had promptly and thoroughly investigated those responsible for setting the rules, but ostensibly violating the rules, Partygate could not have happened.
“In connection with Dominic Cummings, then a central player on Downing Street, the Durham police could and should have done so during the violations and when they were presented with the evidence and complaints.
“Such an action would reinforce the message to the prime minister and the people around him that the Covid regulations they have created and encouraged others to follow must be followed, both in spirit and in letter.
After a three-day investigation in May 2020, Durham police concluded that Cummings’ scandalous trip to Barnard Castle was likely a “minor” breach of the rules.
But the force did not take further action and did not draw conclusions about Cummings’ decision to leave London, as the investigation was limited to Durham County. It also says that there is not enough evidence that Cummings made a second trip to Durham on April 19, 2020, although he took statements from practicing nurse Claire Edwards and her husband Dave who claimed to have seen him. in Durham that day.
In February 2021, Durham police rejected a 225-page file submitted by Afzal’s lawyers alleging that Cummings had repeatedly violated Covid’s rules.
Cummings is also said to have perverted the course of justice in his account of his trip to Barnard Castle on April 12 and to have denied allegations that he made a second trip to Durham around April 19.
Last May, Cummings reiterated to lawmakers that it was “wrong” to say he had made a second trip to Durham. But he seems to have admitted that they left London for the second time due to security concerns: “It is true that I moved my family again.
Asked then to explain how four people claimed to have seen him in and around Durham in Houghall Woods on the morning of April 19, Cummings told the Guardian: “I did not return to Durham on [the] 19th I was in London on [the] 19th and with my son at Hampstead Heath and phone data prove it.
The Guardian saw a photo taken at 3:31 p.m. that day showing Cummings at Hampstead Heath with his family. He also found it possible to travel from Durham to London in less than four hours during the blockade.
Sign up for the First Edition, our free daily newsletter – every weekday morning at 7am BST
Explaining Durham’s decision not to interview Cummings, Farrell told the Mirror: “I remember thinking as he said it would be a statement of circumstances.
“In terms of proportionality, there was an extensive and well-documented account of what he did and where he was. We used this and the information to make decisions about it. “
The metropolitan told Afzal’s lawyers that he had no information about the lessons learned from the Cummings case and referred the matter to Durham police. Durham police have not yet responded, but Farrell told the Mirror that she was “confident and pleased that the decisions we made then will stand the test of time.”
Add Comment